The use of camouflage and deception for combat use on vehicles is shown in my earlier U.S. Pat. Nos. 4,089,491 and 4,212,440 for example.
Mackay U.S. Pat. Nos. 1,305,296 and Brush 715,013 are typical early developments in the area of camouflage. Mackay is directed to multicolored patterns which match surface backgrounds and Brush relates to countershading, or the employment of darker colors on top of a vehicle and lighter colors on the lower surface to kill the contrast between light and shade.
More recently, Barclay U.S. Pat. Nos. 2,190,691 and Robson 2,292,848 disclose various techniques for camouflaging vehicles for the purpose of confusing the enemy as to actual size and shape of a moving body. In general, my two patents above mentioned, show techniques for camouflaging aircraft to reduce the optical signature through counter shading as well as combining patterns designed to offer false visual cues to the enemy as to the vehicles' attitude, and the relationship of upper and lower surfaces as well as recognition of specific type and range.
Todays camouflage is directed primarily toward concealment, either against surface backgrounds such as the green-brown schemes of the 1960s and 1970s, the Asia Minor/desert schemes and the darker gray/green schemes currently in use in Europe, or in more recent developments, aircraft specialized for aerial combat are counter shaded to reduce internal contrast and total average reflectance is selected to match the sky, generally near the horizon, or distant haze or cloud. All current schemes are directed to reducing the optical signature contrast against officially selected backgrounds most likely to be seen during combat. Paints which reduce both radar and infrared signatures are also in use. This invention is designed to cover signatures in all of the light spectrum whether visible or invisible.
Vehicles painted to match selected backgrounds are generally successful and effective when operating in their intended environment. Since high speed vehicles such as aircraft cover large areas in short periods of time, the background against which they fly changes in reflectivity over substantial ranges of values.
An aircraft cannot be expected to match a single selected reflectance background at all times. The fact is that symmetrical single reflectance averaging often does not match the background. If it does not, then it is seen in its entirety as a clearly defined shape in complete contrast to the background and is easily recognizable as to type, attitude and range.
My earlier patents, including those referred to above, were designed to take advantage of varying backgrounds by offering some concealment for at least a portion of the aircraft if not all. This system is designed to deceive and to make it difficult to interpret the nature of the object which is seen. In general, only a portion of the object would be visible against any selected background and that portion will vary, depending upon which background it is seen against. Thus it is that an enemy will have considerable difficulty in determining the type of vehicle if he sees only a portion thereof. Similarly, confusion can be brought about in a nonvisible spectrum by proper treatment of the exposed surfaces. The exposed surfaces can be effective both in the visible spectrum as well as the non-visible spectrum so that the eye can be deceived as well as can electronic equipment.